Our missions in Iraq and Afghanistan remind us of the great dangers of our times.

I know that if we win the next election, the moment I walk through the front door of Downing Street I will have the huge responsibility of protecting the British people from terrorism.

There are some who still believe that the threat we face today is no different from ones that we have faced before, such as the IRA.

They are profoundly mistaken.

We are dealing with people who are prepared to do anything, kill any number, and use suicide attacks to further their aims.

Defeating them will be a battle of hearts and minds, as well as force.

But this threat cannot be negotiated away or appeased - it has to be confronted and overcome.

SECURITY

When it comes to our national security, I will always listen to the police and security services, and take their advice with the utmost seriousness.

I will never play politics with this issue.

What I will do, is my duty.

Which is to support the Government when they do the right thing.

And hold them to account when they're getting it wrong.

So let me say plainly, I believe that this Government is getting some things wrong.

They're pressing ahead with ID cards that won't stop dangerous people coming in to our country.

But they're not giving us the border controls that just might.

They're bringing in new offences that aren't being used.

But they haven't changed the law so that wire tap evidence can be used to prosecute terror suspects in court.

People who threaten our security should be arrested, charged, put in front of a court, tried and imprisoned.

That is the British way.

When I ask myself why they haven't done some of the things they should have, I keep coming back to one thing.

The Human Rights Act.

I believe that yes, the British people need a clear definition of their rights in this complex world.

But I also believe we need a legal framework for those rights that does not hamper the fight against terrorism.

That is why we will abolish the Human Rights Act and put a new British Bill of Rights in its place.

CRIME

Protecting our security is not just about terrorism.

People's daily fear is crime.

Gun crime is up, knife crime is up, there is violence and disorder on too many of our streets.

But all we get from Labour are endless get-tough headlines and thousands of new criminal offences.

They're not building the prisons.

They're not reforming the police.

They're not cancelling the early release schemes.

Those are the things that need to be done.

And then, in the final irony, last week Tony Blair attacked me for what I said about hoodies.

In that one cheap joke, he gave up on one of the best things he ever said - that we need to be tough on the causes of crime.

Everyone in this hall, everyone watching at home, knows that we will only tackle crime…

…if we tackle family breakdown…

…if we tackle drug addiction…

…if we mend broken lives.

So we have a new reality in British politics today.

With David Davis as Home Secretary, this Party, the Conservative Party…

…is the only party in Britain that will be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.

FOREIGN POLICY

And we will be tough when it comes to promoting this country's interests abroad.

Last week the Prime Minister criticised me for wanting a foreign policy which was more independent of the White House.

I don't need lessons in the importance of Britain's relationship with America.

My grandfather went ashore in Normandy in June 1944, in a combined Anglo-American operation that liberated western Europe from the Nazis.

I became involved in politics in the 1980s, when Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan defeated the Soviet Union.

Unlike some, I never had any doubts about whose side I was on in the Cold War.

But now Mr Blair objects when I say our foreign policy should not simply be unquestioning in our relationship with America.

William Hague and I have said we must be steadfast not slavish in how we approach the special relationship.

Apparently Tony Blair disagrees.

Well if he's accusing me of wanting to be a British Prime Minister pursuing a British foreign policy…

…then I plead guilty.

Questioning the approach of the US administration…

…trying to learn the lessons of the past five years…

…does not make you "anti-American."

Ask John McCain.

I'm not a neo-conservative.

I'm a liberal Conservative.

Liberal - because I believe in spreading freedom and democracy, and supporting humanitarian intervention.

That is why we cannot stand by and watch further genocide in Darfur.

But Conservative - because I also recognise the complexities of human nature, and will always be sceptical of grand schemes to remake the world.

We need more patience, more humility in the way we engage with the world.

COHESION

The same values should guide our approach to building a stronger society at home.

The Cantle Report into the riots in our northern cities in 2001 talked about many communities living "parallel lives."

Communities where people from different ethnic origins never meet, never talk, never go into each others' homes.

Ultimately, it is an emotional connection that binds a country together.

Sympathy for people you don't even know, and who may be very different to you.

It is by contact that we overcome our differences - and realise that though our origins and our cultures may vary, we all share common values.

The most basic contact comes from talking to each other.

So we must make sure that new immigrants learn to speak English.

And one of the most important ways we make connections with people is at school.

So let me face head-on the question of faith schools.

I know that people feel strongly about this issue.

So do I.

I support faith schools.

Many parents want to send their children to them, and trust their judgment.

All faiths want them.

And let us say, clearly, that Islam is one of the great religions of the world, and that British Muslims make a fantastic contribution to our country.

Today, a new generation of Muslim schools is emerging.

If these schools are to be British state schools, they must be part of our society, not separate from it.

The Cantle Report recommended that faith schools admit a proportion of pupils from other faiths.

Only this week the Church of England said it would implement this recommendation in all new church schools it creates…

…admitting a quarter of pupils from non-Anglican backgrounds.

That is a great example of what I mean by social responsibility.

The Church deciding to take responsibility for community cohesion.

Society - not the state.

I believe the time has come for other faith groups to show similar social responsibility.

And if we are to bring our society together, then schools - all schools…

…must teach children that wherever they come from, if they are British citizens, they are inheritors of a British birthright.

The foundations of our society: the rule of law, democracy and individual freedom.

And every child in our country, wherever they come from, must know and deeply understand what it means to be British.

The components of our identity - our institutions, our language and our history.

The Conservative Party must address these issues.

Real substance means addressing them openly and frankly.

The issues are incredibly complicated.

They will need sensitive handling.

And I can't think of anyone better to do it than our Shadow Education Secretary, David Willetts.

EDUCATION

Although we agree with Labour about trust schools, there is still a profound divide between our approach to education and Labour's.

They think equality means treating every child the same.

Including kids with learning difficulties in the same classes as the brightest.

Forcing schools to accept disruptive pupils, putting up with bad behaviour, no matter the damage it does to the others.

We think equality means something else.

Individual children have individual needs, individual abilities, and individual interests

Real equality means giving every child the education that is best for them.

That should mean more setting and streaming within schools - so each child can develop at the speed that works for them.

It should mean clear rules of behaviour - so that our children grow up knowing the difference between right and wrong.

And it means saving special schools - so that parents have choice, and children with learning difficulties can receive the care, the education and the attention they need.

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

Building a strong society is not just a task for politicians.

We are all in this together.

We all have a responsibility to each other.

Changing Britain for the better is not just about passing laws.

We've got to be less arrogant about what politicians can achieve.

Because it is not the politicians who make the wealth…

…who build the houses …

…who heal the sick.

It is people.

It is society, not just the state.

That is why social responsibility will be the foundation for all that we do.

When our Party was last in power, our task was to restore economic responsibility - putting individuals and businesses in charge of their own affairs.

The task for us today is different.

For years, we Conservatives talked about rolling back the state.

But that is not an end in itself.

Our fundamental aim is to roll forward the frontiers of society.

FAMILY

And there is one vital way in which we can do that.

The real privilege of my childhood was that my family was loving and close.

Families, to me, are not just the basic unit of society, they're the best.

They are the ultimate source of our society's strength or weakness.

Families matter because almost every social problem that we face comes down to family stability.

And so I will set a simple test for each and every one of our policies: does it help families?

The first thing to help families with is childcare.

This is particularly vital for single parents.

Why are so many single parents trapped in poverty?

Partly because childcare is so costly and complicated in our country.

Those of us who don't live the life of a single parent - just try and imagine it for a moment.

Think about what it's like when you're left on your own to look after the kids.

If I'm in charge on my own for just a few hours the place looks like a bomb's hit it.

Imagine looking after children all on your own all the time.

And trying to get a job…

…trying to hold down a job with an employer who isn't understanding about the fact that you might have to disappear at a moment's notice because there's no one else in your child's life, and you are responsible.

Britain has got the most expensive childcare in Europe.

So we support the Government's efforts to put more money into childcare.

But why are they saying you should only get help if you use formal childcare?

What about the grandparents, the friends, the neighbours…who for so many families, provide that lifeline by looking after the kids.

So let's trust the parents in the childcare choices that they make.

All families do a vital job, and they all need our support.

But I also believe that marriage is a great institution, and we should support it.

I'm not naïve in thinking that somehow the state can engineer happy families with this policy or that tax break.

All I can tell you is what I think.

And what I think is this.

There's something special about marriage.

It's not about religion.

It's not about morality.

It's about commitment.

When you stand up there, in front of your friends and your family, in front of the world, whether it's in a church or anywhere else, what you're doing really means something.

Pledging yourself to another means doing something brave and important.

You are making a commitment.

You are publicly saying: it's not just about me, me me anymore.

It is about we - together, the two of us, through thick and thin.

That really matters.

And by the way, it means something whether you're a man and a woman, a woman and a woman or a man and another man.

That's why we were right to support civil partnerships, and I'm proud of that.

Of course not every marriage lasts, and many couples are much better off apart.

Women must have an escape route from abusive relationships.

Every married couple has rows and difficulties.

But if you've made that public commitment, it just helps you try harder to work your problems through.

We can argue for ever about whether favouring marriage means disadvantaging other arrangements.

My approach is simple.

If marriage rates went up, if divorce rates came down - if more couples stayed together for longer, would our society by better off?

My answer is yes.

But supporting marriage is not just about money, or tax breaks.

It is insulting to the human spirit to believe that a relationship between two people is just about money, or even mainly about money.

It isn't.

So recognising marriage more directly in the tax system is not enough.

Flexible working.

Family centres.

Relationship advice.

All of these things matter.

Let us as a society and as a culture value and recognise marriage more.

CONCLUSION

Family.

Community.

Society.

The NHS.

The environment.

Our quality of life.

These are the things that matter most to me.

These are the things that drive me in politics.

And I want us here to be optimistic about their future.

Tony Blair said Britain is a young country.

He is wrong.

This is an old country, with a proud past and a bright future.

Look at the forces shaping our world.

Technology that can topple dictators.

Innovations that can tackle climate change.

The prospect of global trade and investment and development that can end the spectre of poverty and heal the divisions between rich and poor.

Our generation of politicians must understand these forces, must harness them for progress.

We must not be the party that says the world and our country is going to the dogs.

We must be the Party that lifts people's sights and raises their hopes.